RP Listener Forum

RAFT  »   Climate Change
Post to this Topic
marko86  (North TX)
Aug 28, 2015 - 7:39am

 Lazy8 wrote:
 miamizsun wrote:
they may touch on it here 

They don't. No matter how nifty the process is they can't repeal the laws of thermodynamics.

That said I should clarify something: when you burn hydrocarbons you aren't just burning carbon, you're also burning hydrogen. You get energy from both oxidation reactions, you just have to give some of it up in this process to convert the CO2 to elemental carbon.

It will take more energy to return carbon to its elemental valance state than to the state it was in when it was part of a hydrocarbon molecule; you will need more energy than you got from the original combustion even if the process were 100% efficient, which it can't be. That doesn't mean you don't use ALL the energy of burning a hydrocarbon to convert just the carbon fraction, I haven't done that math so I don't know. If we had a magical new combustion process that allowed us to skip the step in the middle and leave nothing but water and elemental carbon as reaction products we could (theoretically) just harvest the energy of burning the hydrogen off the hydrocarbon, less the energy difference between the carbon in its hydrocarbon state and elemental forms. But we don't, so each step adds inefficiencies.

In this case massive ones.

In a hypothetical world where we never burned hydrocarbons and we had this process running in the atmosphere to extract CO2 and turn it into carbon nanotubes (I suggest "Project Rapunzel" as the title) it would just be consuming solar energy. But that CO2 came from burning hydrocarbons, which were burned to power things. We'd almost undoubtedly be better off just using the solar-generated electricity directly and skip burning the hydrocarbons in the first place.

Cool process tho. I wish they hadn't pitched it as a magic bullet for climate change; it has potential to drastically reduce the cost of carbon fibers. Which is reason alone to pursue it.

 

I think you summed it up quite well. Having operated nuclear power plants, I have some knowledge of thermodynamics and such. Its really the scaling math that doesn't work. 100 amps to make 20 grams of carbon fiber per hour. We are pumping somewhere north of 40 billion TONS of carbon into the air every year, so it just can't really work. Worrying about having too much of a carbon sink is just silly.
 
miamizsun  ((3261.3 Miles SE of RP))
Aug 27, 2015 - 6:32am

 aflanigan wrote:

I think what I'm saying is pretty straightforward, Jeff. We humans sometimes latch onto a promising solution to intractable problems without carefully thinking through the ramifications. 

The process of getting rid of the cane beetle by introducing cane toads was straightforward, as you put it. Bring in hungry toads, they eat pesky beetles, problem solved! Except it didn't work out that way. An entirely new problem was created instead.

One big question I have has to do with the carbon cycle. Could locking up carbon in the form of nanotubes, nanoparticles, nanofibers, etc.  cause problems, particularly if we get overzealous in conducting this process? Carbon is an essential material for planetary survival (plants and animals). How readily can this carbon be liberated as needed in the format we plan to store it in when creating carbon sinks to replace the hydrocarbon sinks we used to have (oil and coal deposits)? What sort of byproducts might be produced?

Look before you leap. 

 
according to the powers that be we're releasing a lot of carbon emissions

we have an idea of a natural background levels/ranges (up to 350 ppm or so)

obviously the problem is receiving much more hype than the solution(s) (classic sales tactic, your p needs to be greater than your s {#Wink} )

and while i agree that the climate isn't static, we are told that we're at the upper end of our CE range

there is also talk of tipping points runaway feedbacks, etc. leading to endless doom porn scenarios

conservation/efficiency is good, but if we need to reduce the current levels asap this looks like an one idea that we could possibly control and monitor (in a relatively easy manner considering scope/scale)

the precautionary principle can paralyze the best of us

in science/experiments there are a lot of duds but we have to take and accept risk and push on or do nothing at our own peril

can we try this and see if we can at least offset our current CE?

regards


 
RichardPrins
Aug 26, 2015 - 10:33am

Islamic leaders issue bold call for rapid phase out of fossil fuels | Environment | The Guardian


 Red_Dragon wrote:
grok my sarcasm, Richard. 

Obviously.
 
Red_Dragon  (Republican Jesusland)
Aug 26, 2015 - 4:45am

 RichardPrins wrote:

Belief: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

 
grok my sarcasm, Richard.
 
RichardPrins
Aug 25, 2015 - 8:46pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
 
Belief: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence
 
Red_Dragon  (Republican Jesusland)
Aug 25, 2015 - 8:26pm

 RichardPrins wrote:
Attorney Hounding Climate Scientists Covertly Funded By Coal Industry

Christopher Horner, an attorney who claims that the earth is cooling, is known within the scientific community for hounding climate change researchers with relentless investigations and public ridicule, often deriding scientists as “communists” and frauds.

Horner is a regular guest on Fox News and CNN, and has been affiliated with a number of think tanks and legal organizations over the last decade. He has called for investigations of climate scientists affiliated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and NASA, and inundated climate researchers at major universities across the country with records requests that critics say are designed to distract them from their work.

New court documents reveal one source of Horner’s funding: big coal. (...)

Giant Coal Company Bankruptcy Reveals Secret Ties to Climate Denial, GOP Dark Money Groups

 

 
RichardPrins
Aug 25, 2015 - 4:57pm

Attorney Hounding Climate Scientists Covertly Funded By Coal Industry

Christopher Horner, an attorney who claims that the earth is cooling, is known within the scientific community for hounding climate change researchers with relentless investigations and public ridicule, often deriding scientists as “communists” and frauds.

Horner is a regular guest on Fox News and CNN, and has been affiliated with a number of think tanks and legal organizations over the last decade. He has called for investigations of climate scientists affiliated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and NASA, and inundated climate researchers at major universities across the country with records requests that critics say are designed to distract them from their work.

New court documents reveal one source of Horner’s funding: big coal. (...)

Giant Coal Company Bankruptcy Reveals Secret Ties to Climate Denial, GOP Dark Money Groups
 
aflanigan  (At Sea)
Aug 25, 2015 - 3:17pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

Mmmm...sky pie!

So we react carbon with oxygen to get energy—that's what happens when you burn hydrocarbons.

Then we use energy to strip oxygen off carbon dioxide to make carbon—that's what happens when you convert CO2 to carbon.

Anybody see a problem here?

Anybody who took thermodynamics in college, maybe?

Anybody?

 
I miss Robert Park's weekly "What's New" newsletter/email. He tended to stay on top of this kind of pie-in-the-sky stuff.

You could consider giving up your lucrative career as a poster on RP and take over for him??? 

http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/ 
 
Lazy8  (The Gallatin Valley of Montana)
Aug 25, 2015 - 2:48pm

 miamizsun wrote:
they may touch on it here 

They don't. No matter how nifty the process is they can't repeal the laws of thermodynamics.

That said I should clarify something: when you burn hydrocarbons you aren't just burning carbon, you're also burning hydrogen. You get energy from both oxidation reactions, you just have to give some of it up in this process to convert the CO2 to elemental carbon.

It will take more energy to return carbon to its elemental valance state than to the state it was in when it was part of a hydrocarbon molecule; you will need more energy than you got from the original combustion even if the process were 100% efficient, which it can't be. That doesn't mean you use ALL the energy of burning a hydrocarbon to convert just the carbon fraction, I haven't done that math so I don't know. If we had a magical new combustion process that allowed us to skip the step in the middle and leave nothing but water and elemental carbon as reaction products we could (theoretically) just harvest the energy of burning the hydrogen off the hydrocarbon, less the energy difference between the carbon in its hydrocarbon state and elemental forms. But we don't, so each step adds inefficiencies.

In this case massive ones.

In a hypothetical world where we never burned hydrocarbons and we had this process running in the atmosphere to extract CO2 and turn it into carbon nanotubes (I suggest "Project Rapunzel" as the title) it would just be consuming solar energy. But that CO2 came from burning hydrocarbons, which were burned to power things. We'd almost undoubtedly be better off just using the solar-generated electricity directly and skip burning the hydrocarbons in the first place.

Cool process tho. I wish they hadn't pitched it as a magic bullet for climate change; it has potential to drastically reduce the cost of carbon fibers. Which is reason alone to pursue it.


 
miamizsun  ((3261.3 Miles SE of RP))
Aug 25, 2015 - 1:16pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
 miamizsun wrote:
looks like we're on the way to being saved...

a decade or so to pre-industrial levels of co2

i blame the american chemical society

=============================

New carbon nanofiber process could reduce atmospheric C02 to pre-industrial levels in just a decade
by , 08/22/15

Imagine being able to turn pollution into something useful while returning the planet to pre-industrial carbon levels in just ten years. Scientists believe that it’s possible: a new process developed by team at George Washington University could manufacture the fibers using carbon dioxide extracted from Earth’s atmosphere – talk about a win/win for everyone. The double-whammy discovery could help tackle climate change, while revolutionizing many industries. According to Gizmag, carbon nanofibers could one day be used for everything from building better bulletproof vests to fixing damaged hearts, not to mention making a big dent in climate change.

Mmmm...sky pie!

So we react carbon with oxygen to get energy—that's what happens when you burn hydrocarbons.

Then we use energy to strip oxygen off carbon dioxide to make carbon—that's what happens when you convert CO2 to carbon.

Anybody see a problem here?

Anybody who took thermodynamics in college, maybe?

Anybody?

 
they may touch on it here


 
islander  (Seattle)
Aug 25, 2015 - 1:14pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
Mmmm...sky pie!

So we react carbon with oxygen to get energy—that's what happens when you burn hydrocarbons.

Then we use energy to strip oxygen off carbon dioxide to make carbon—that's what happens when you convert CO2 to carbon.

Anybody see a problem here?

Anybody who took thermodynamics in college, maybe?

Anybody?

 
There is something unwholesome about flying a kite at night.


 
Lazy8  (The Gallatin Valley of Montana)
Aug 25, 2015 - 12:54pm

 miamizsun wrote:
looks like we're on the way to being saved...

a decade or so to pre-industrial levels of co2

i blame the american chemical society

=============================

New carbon nanofiber process could reduce atmospheric C02 to pre-industrial levels in just a decade
by , 08/22/15

Imagine being able to turn pollution into something useful while returning the planet to pre-industrial carbon levels in just ten years. Scientists believe that it’s possible: a new process developed by team at George Washington University could manufacture the fibers using carbon dioxide extracted from Earth’s atmosphere – talk about a win/win for everyone. The double-whammy discovery could help tackle climate change, while revolutionizing many industries. According to Gizmag, carbon nanofibers could one day be used for everything from building better bulletproof vests to fixing damaged hearts, not to mention making a big dent in climate change.

Mmmm...sky pie!

So we react carbon with oxygen to get energy—that's what happens when you burn hydrocarbons.

Then we use energy to strip oxygen off carbon dioxide to make carbon—that's what happens when you convert CO2 to carbon.

Anybody see a problem here?

Anybody who took thermodynamics in college, maybe?

Anybody?
 
aflanigan  (At Sea)
Aug 25, 2015 - 8:51am

 miamizsun wrote:

i'm not sure what you're saying here or how that compares

are you saying that removing co2 is going to cause a "biocontrol" issue?

 
I think what I'm saying is pretty straightforward, Jeff. We humans sometimes latch onto a promising solution to intractable problems without carefully thinking through the ramifications. 

The process of getting rid of the cane beetle by introducing cane toads was straightforward, as you put it. Bring in hungry toads, they eat pesky beetles, problem solved! Except it didn't work out that way. An entirely new problem was created instead.

One big question I have has to do with the carbon cycle. Could locking up carbon in the form of nanotubes, nanoparticles, nanofibers, etc.  cause problems, particularly if we get overzealous in conducting this process? Carbon is an essential material for planetary survival (plants and animals). How readily can this carbon be liberated as needed in the format we plan to store it in when creating carbon sinks to replace the hydrocarbon sinks we used to have (oil and coal deposits)? What sort of byproducts might be produced?

Look before you leap. 
 
miamizsun  ((3261.3 Miles SE of RP))
Aug 25, 2015 - 6:29am

 aflanigan wrote:
 miamizsun wrote:
looks like we're on the way to being saved...

a decade or so to pre-industrial levels of co2

i blame the american chemical society

=============================


Interesting and potentially promising, but the devil lies in the details (i.e. potential unforeseen consequences). Think, for example, of the introduction of the Cane Toad as biocontrol to deal with the problem of the greyback cane beetle.

 
i'm not sure what you're saying here or how that compares

are you saying that removing co2 is going to cause a "biocontrol" issue?

maybe less greening?

some sort of unknown runaway feedback loop?

as i understand it, the removal and conversion process is dead simple and relatively easy to scale

the big danger here is that it could potentially derail and/or deleverage a massive bureaucratic movement

like all of the other political wars by the state, there are huge amounts people vested in this

careers, pensions, corporate cronyism are potentially on the line here

there may be awesome science and technology readily available but the political incentive or will to marginalize a massive contingent is practically nil

look at the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on poverty, etc.

these state warriors, their depts and their guns aren't going anywhere

in fact a couple are being armed to the teeth with military grade weapons

it's fairly easy to see that the war on co2 is literally over if we wanted it to be

co2 has been surrounded and has surrendered and is waiting to be put into the re-purposing prison camp of science

within a decade or so the tech could be up and running to minimize and even reduce it and make green fuels, carbon nanofiber and other wonderful products

what's the goal of the powers that be? another war?

think they'll redirect any funds from useless political wars to save the planet?

i'm not so sure it's a priority

your tax dollars at work...

 
islander  (Seattle)
Aug 24, 2015 - 3:15pm

 miamizsun wrote:
looks like we're on the way to being saved...

a decade or so to pre-industrial levels of co2

i blame the american chemical society

=============================

New carbon nanofiber process could reduce atmospheric C02 to pre-industrial levels in just a decade
by , 08/22/15

Imagine being able to turn pollution into something useful while returning the planet to pre-industrial carbon levels in just ten years. Scientists believe that it’s possible: a new process developed by team at George Washington University could manufacture the fibers using carbon dioxide extracted from Earth’s atmosphere – talk about a win/win for everyone. The double-whammy discovery could help tackle climate change, while revolutionizing many industries. According to Gizmag, carbon nanofibers could one day be used for everything from building better bulletproof vests to fixing damaged hearts, not to mention making a big dent in climate change.

 
Now if they would just get to work on my tank of algae that secretes biodiesel we would be set. I figure about 30 gallons a day yield with a decent buffer tank and I'd be all set on the boat.... Actually, if I'm making my own I'd like 55 gallons a day please.
 
aflanigan  (At Sea)
Aug 24, 2015 - 3:04pm

 miamizsun wrote:
looks like we're on the way to being saved...

a decade or so to pre-industrial levels of co2

i blame the american chemical society

=============================

 

Interesting and potentially promising, but the devil lies in the details (i.e. potential unforeseen consequences). Think, for example, of the introduction of the Cane Toad as biocontrol to deal with the problem of the greyback cane beetle.
 
miamizsun  ((3261.3 Miles SE of RP))
Aug 22, 2015 - 3:34pm

looks like we're on the way to being saved...

a decade or so to pre-industrial levels of co2

i blame the american chemical society

=============================

New carbon nanofiber process could reduce atmospheric C02 to pre-industrial levels in just a decade
by , 08/22/15





Imagine being able to turn pollution into something useful while returning the planet to pre-industrial carbon levels in just ten years. Scientists believe that it’s possible: a new process developed by team at George Washington University could manufacture the fibers using carbon dioxide extracted from Earth’s atmosphere – talk about a win/win for everyone. The double-whammy discovery could help tackle climate change, while revolutionizing many industries. According to Gizmag, carbon nanofibers could one day be used for everything from building better bulletproof vests to fixing damaged hearts, not to mention making a big dent in climate change.
 
RichardPrins
Aug 21, 2015 - 12:45pm

July 2015: The hottest month ever recorded
Earlier this week, data from NASA and the Japan Meteorological Agency showed July was the hottest July on record, globally. Thanks to a particularly strong El Niño, these sorts of monthly records have been coming fast and furiously lately, so that news like this almost seemed like nbd. But then, on Thursday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration confirmed that not only was last month the hottest July on record globally, it was also the hottest month on record overall. Since NOAA started keeping track in 1880, there has never been a hotter month. That’s a very big deal. (...)

 
RichardPrins
Jul 9, 2015 - 10:15am


via
 
RichardPrins
Jul 3, 2015 - 4:14pm


 
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 68, 69, 70  Next